> There are obviously questions about dropping (. e) mapping to e, so I think
> we should just keep it. We can drop it later if we need to.
By the way, I tweaked the curly-infix implementation so that { . x} maps to x.
It's not in the spec, at least the way I read it, but before it was crashing
and I think *that* was unacceptable. Basically, if a curly-infix list isn't a
pair, it just returns the non-pair. This is an extension to how it handles ().
Any other improper list, e.g., {a b . c}, now maps to (nfx a b . c).
Thoughts?
--- David A. Wheeler
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Live Security Virtual Conference
Exclusive live event will cover all the ways today's security and
threat landscape has changed and how IT managers can respond. Discussions
will include endpoint security, mobile security and the latest in malware
threats. http://www.accelacomm.com/jaw/sfrnl04242012/114/50122263/
_______________________________________________
Readable-discuss mailing list
Readable-discuss@lists.sourceforge.net
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/readable-discuss
